linux-kernel - Re: [kpsingh:static_calls] [security] 9e15595ed0: Kernel_panic-not_syncing:lsm_static_call_init-Ran_out_of_static

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date: Mon, 15 Apr 2024 10:23:38 -0400
From: Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>
To: Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>
Cc: KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>, kernel test robot <oliver.sang@...el.com>, oe-lkp@...ts.linux.dev, 
	lkp@...el.com, Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>, Kees Cook <keescook@...omium.org>, 
	Song Liu <song@...nel.org>, Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, 
	linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [kpsingh:static_calls] [security] 9e15595ed0: Kernel_panic-not_syncing:lsm_static_call_init-Ran_out_of_static_slots

On Mon, Apr 15, 2024 at 9:21 AM Tetsuo Handa
<penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp> wrote:
> On 2024/04/15 17:26, KP Singh wrote:
> > This seems like an odd config which does not enable STATIC_CALL, I am going to
> > make CONFIG_SECURITY depend on CONFIG_STATIC_CALL and make the dependency explicit.
>
> If CONFIG_SECURITY depends on CONFIG_STATIC_CALL, architectures which do not
> support CONFIG_STATIC_CALL can no longer use LSM ? That sounds a bad dependency.

Agreed.  If the arch doesn't support static calls we need a fallback
solution for the LSM that is no worse than what we have now, and
preferably would still solve the issue of the BPF hooks active even
where this is no BPF program attached.

-- 
paul-moore.com